Who defines 'overpriced'? For some people, the 5DIII at $2900 was too expensive...for others, $3500 is not too expensive.

The answer to my question is 'the market' defines 'overpriced' and that leads to low sales, which might lead to a reduction in the MAP. But if sales don't drop much, or at all...

You are right, the market defines "overpriced". So, the fact that retailers cut into their profit in order to move the product tells me that the camera hadn't been flying off the shelves at the regular price.

However, the camera market is not perfect. Because of the cost of switching to another brand, Canon can get away with overcharging their customers.

@ cliffwang, if you spend your life waiting for the price to reach your level, you'll end up either waiting a very long time, or you will end up buying antiquated technology (I can get a 1D II for less than I paid for my 7D, but I do not want an 8MP body that cannot go above ISO 3200). Canon may lose some customers , or rather, should I say some existing Canon shooters may defer their purchase, but ultimately they will upgrade at some point in the future and they'll get a better used price for their existing body as a result of this policy.

I think you missed my point.If I didn't get a good deal, I wouldn't buy my 5D3. I am very happy with my 5D3; However, if I needed to make a decision again to pay full price to upgrade my 5D2, I wouldn't. In this point Canon is not going make any penny from me.Two of my colleagues is not going to upgrade to 5D3 if the MAP pricing policy lets them pay full price. Actually one of them is jumping to Nikon because he doesn't have any EF mount lens.We could upgrade our camera every 3 to 4 years if we think the price is reasonable(no matter retail discount or Canon discount). The new MAP pricing will just let us slow the upgrade or switch to other competitors. What happens here is Canon is not only going to loss it revenue for now but also it market share for long term. I have used Canon gears for years and I really don't want to see that happens.Anyway, it's too early to tell the MAP is good for Canon or not. Since I have upgraded to 5D3 and have enough gears, I am not going to worry about that for another few years. Time will tell if Canon made a right decision or not.

So if Nikon didn't exist 5DIII would be excellent and now it is not?And who decides what is the correct number of megapixels?

Well, I never said Canon was not a good camera - only overpriced. And yes, economics 101 tells us that in the absence of competition Canon would command a higher price. But when they are not king of the hill any more, they better price their products competitively.

@ tron & RC, well done, you both spotted a bargain and got a good deal

@ Etienne, it is human nature to worry about what others did or didn't do (in this instance 'pay'), but you should only worry about yourself. Two years ago, the graduating MBA class at Harvard University were given a survey questionnaire with 2 options and were asked to specify which they would prefer:

(1) to get a job paying $200,000 per year, whilst the rest of your class secure jobs paying $250,000

The result: the majority opted for (2) They were more concerned with relative position and rankings than absolute income. The moral of this story: forget what someone else paid for a DSLR, and focus on whether in the future a new DSLR would suit your needs, then save the necessary cash to get what you desire.

If everyone followed your logic (based on the psychology of what others have paid for an identical product) then Europeans would not buy Canon DSLR's or lenses at +25% to +50% more than what Americans pay today for the same models. In my country, a 5D3 costs US$4,420 (or €3,399 x 1.30) and that price has dropped 200 euros.@ cliffwang, if you spend your life waiting for the price to reach your level, you'll end up either waiting a very long time, or you will end up buying antiquated technology (I can get a 1D II for less than I paid for my 7D, but I do not want an 8MP body that cannot go above ISO 3200). Canon may lose some customers , or rather, should I say some existing Canon shooters may defer their purchase, but ultimately they will upgrade at some point in the future and they'll get a better used price for their existing body as a result of this policy.

GREAT point DB. I'm glad Canon took control of this situation.

As many photographers, I do plan to upgrade to 5D 4(what ever that might come) - seeing the price drop 20%ish within 6-7 months on a NEW + HOT product is not great thing.

I do expect the price to drop $200 - $300 within couple years, but not FREEFALL up to $800 for less than a year.

Sarcasm aside, that too. The sensor is one of the most important aspects - that's the major reason 5DII costs 50% more than 7D, despite its speed, AF, etc.

So, if Nikon can offer better DR and similar low ISO performance in a higher MP sensor, what makes Canon think they can initially ask $500 more for their camera?

Market decides the price. Canon marketing team decided the price based on many factors. Number of users, brand name, glasses, etc. Price is not always reflected on a product specs. Why will many people buy iPad mini even Nexus 7 is better than it on specs. That's very complicated.

Sarcasm aside, that too. The sensor is one of the most important aspects - that's the major reason 5DII costs 50% more than 7D, despite its speed, AF, etc.

So, if Nikon can offer better DR and similar low ISO performance in a higher MP sensor, what makes Canon think they can initially ask $500 more for their camera?

Probably the high ISO that the D800 cannot reach. I really think the 5D3/D800 debate isn't valid because in my opinion they are for slightly different audiences. If I need a wedding camera that shoots at high ISO's, I'm not buying a D800, I'm getting a 5D3. If I want to shoot daylight landscape with tilt-shift lenses and get amazing detail at low ISO's, I'll go D800. I'm not taking a D800 to a wedding and shooting RAW and also have to bring a ton of lighting.

@ cliffwang, if you spend your life waiting for the price to reach your level, you'll end up either waiting a very long time, or you will end up buying antiquated technology (I can get a 1D II for less than I paid for my 7D, but I do not want an 8MP body that cannot go above ISO 3200). Canon may lose some customers , or rather, should I say some existing Canon shooters may defer their purchase, but ultimately they will upgrade at some point in the future and they'll get a better used price for their existing body as a result of this policy.

I think you missed my point.If I didn't get a good deal, I wouldn't buy my 5D3. I am very happy with my 5D3; However, if I needed to make a decision again to pay full price to upgrade my 5D2, I wouldn't. In this point Canon is not going make any penny from me.Two of my colleagues is not going to upgrade to 5D3 if the MAP pricing policy lets them pay full price. Actually one of them is jumping to Nikon because he doesn't have any EF mount lens.We could upgrade our camera every 3 to 4 years if we think the price is reasonable(no matter retail discount or Canon discount). The new MAP pricing will just let us slow the upgrade or switch to other competitors. What happens here is Canon is not only going to loss it revenue for now but also it market share for long term. I have used Canon gears for years and I really don't want to see that happens.Anyway, it's too early to tell the MAP is good for Canon or not. Since I have upgraded to 5D3 and have enough gears, I am not going to worry about that for another few years. Time will tell if Canon made a right decision or not.

If Canon makes no profits from consumer, how do they stay in business? how do they conts. to make great lenses. I guess you will switch to Nikon after your 5D III?

I think MAP may even be to save other market. In Italy the difference between official price and the price you could find buying intenet (off course not Italian warranty and so on) is very step, so that it may have led to low sales of canon imported products. I have seen shop selling less canon cameras and pushing nikon because they could not compete with internet prices. A MAP policy may lead to more difficult black market product and incresing officially imported cameras.

For what concerne 5DIII price, the fact that it is so higher the the d800 may be because while d800 has new sensor but kept same AF and is less different fron d700, developing 5DIII thay had to develop new sensor, new AF, new body and new everithing. It could not be less expensive than d800.Diego

the canon-to-nikon switch I find plausible, if you don't have a big glass investment, although I think sooner or later the 5D Mark III will come down in price to be closer to the D800.

the people who are mentioning a switch to Sony, I find that heartily amusing, to say the least. have you seen the sum total of their glass offerings? slim pickings compared to Canon. have you counted the number of Sony lenses that cost the same or less than comparable Canon offerings? pretty darn hard to find. they've been price gouging from day one.